Warrior Rework to Balance the job

[Lyth]

If Bloodwhetting's balance issues are related to standard dungeon content only, and there's a consensus here that such details don't matter in terms of the broader picture of job balance, then the sensible thing is to revise Bloodwhetting such that the heal applies only once per weaponskill. It's clearly a sticking point of perceived unfairness by the broader playerbase, but it costs you nothing in terms of job balance to change it. If anything, it's a hotfix, not a nerf, since the effect would actually match the tooltip description.

'Additional Effect: Restores HP with each weaponskill successfully delivered.'

The balance questions that do need to be raised are in the context of raidwide mitigation and invulns. If you're designing fights with physical raidwides, you can't have some tanks bringing conditional mitigation and others having universal mitigation. I think a decision needs to be made here. Either Shake, Veil, and Passage should apply to physical damage only, or Dark Missionary and HoL should apply to all damage types. There needs to also be a consensus about whether these raidwides provide sustain effects or not across the board.

Likewise, if we're seeing fight designs with four to five tankbusters to be distributed across two tanks, then you can't have a 3 minute variation between invuln recasts.

I think if you addressed these three issues, then the discussion over WAR should settle down. It would probably start up again over GNB, but that's a story for another day.

[whiskeybravo]

then the discussion over WAR should settle down. .

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

[Shurrikhan]

But why give it only a flat 400p per action, needlessly copying PLD, when we already had a model that worked better (i.e., that was more easily balanced and more engaging) -- healing for a % of damage dealt, or at least the impact of that model (diminishing returns beyond ST)?

The only defensives not to really scale at all with incoming damage is TBN (since it's so bimodal with such a high cost for failing to pop it) and the heal per Req action on PLD. Neither is in an exceptional place, even if they are each interesting or decently fitting sources of sustain, respectively. But it would neither be more interesting or fitting on Warrior.

Moreover, future Criterion dungeons, if ever they had larger viable pulls but with that much higher damage intake, might require (similarly to Holy Shelltron, for which the %mit is higher but total healing given less), that more of its sustain output scales with context. That would require letting heal for a bit more as incoming damage increases (a % of damage taken) or at least as target count increases (as now) or the Warrior's own outgoing damage increases (as in Shadowbringers).

Healing per target hit makes decent sense for Bloodwhetting; it simply should have diminishing returns so that it doesn't heal for the same rate on each further enemy that it heals off the first struck, be those diminishing returns inherited (as from % of damage dealt) or forced (as per 50% less from each additional enemy).

[ThorinG]

A simple question on the core issue:

"Compared to other tanks, is the self sustainability of WAR balanced in dungeons or not?"

If yes, then please explain in the context of "tanks sustainability in dungeons"

If no, then limit BW heal scalibilty per target,which seems to be the solution requested by dissatisfied players, and a nerf which will only impact dungeons and no other content.

[Shurrikhan]

It only concerns dungeons.
You don't even need to rework them all, just update the current expert dungeons and apply the recipe to future dungeons.

Let's forget for the moment that it, in fact, concerns anything with AoE.

Even if we ignored that, you are suggesting that rather than simply adjusting the scaling factor for additional enemies struck by Bloodwhetting / Nascent so that it doesn't make up ~40% of a Warrior's sustain (vs. ~26% from Holy Shelltron, ~24% for TBN & Oblation, or ~24% for Heart of Corundum), we instead remove AoE from any and all future dungeons.

???

This would be like if the devs had taken Flare hitting for its full damage per target such that people would drop from Brayflox HM if they didn't enough BLMs and, rather than deciding to simply fix Flare's scaling, figured they would instead reduce all dungeons to a single mob pullable per wall.

Thankfully, they didn't. Because what you're suggesting would be absurd. Far too much so even for XIV's developments.

____________________

A simple way to balance warrior without having to constrain content further into doldrum for the entire game, is simply to...

1. Give Bloodwhetting diminished healing per target after the first enemy struck (more use cases for 2-3 targets, more engaging in terms of broader decisions) or heal for a portion of damage dealt (more engaging in terms of banking and bursting). (This brings it in check without costing it its flavor.)
   
   
2. Bring Holmgang's CD up roughly to everyone else's. (E.g., 7 minute Hallowed, 5 minute Holmgang, 6 minutes for the rest, at greatest spread.)
   
   
3. Have Dark Missionary and Heart of Light (and Dark Mind) grant some degree of general (not just magic-specific) mitigation, by whatever means, as to be a decent bit better against magic than purely general skills and a decent bit worse but not crippled against physical damage OR remove the categorical mitigation entirely and find another way to differentiate them.

Those three suggestions have been frequent since Endwalker dropped, btw.

[MikoRemi]

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

Indeed. It’s the most braindead option to try to hurt whats doing good for itself instead of trying to come up with actual ways to fix a bad job. Sadly these are the same people that want to keep the “uniqueness” of Dark Mind only blocking magic damage. Yikes.

[Magikazam]

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

As a Tank player, WAR is problematic to the enjoyments of others. Not only we got the current discussion where you know, sustain be strong in dungeon to an obvious state where the healer can forget to heal and no bad consequences will happen from that. But you also need to remember that Tank have Warrior as a punching bag due to the fact it known to canibalise on other tank unique stuff. Biggest exemple is, of course SHB DRK losing it self sustain gameplay for warrior to get it, but instead of recovering a small ammount of hp every weaponskill, they just overheal themselves and one ally for ammounts you would see on a healer spending ressources. all of that on a 17 sec coldown.

Hell, imagine they put some more magical damage next savage tier and it wouldn't be so surprising if warrior complain they can't compete with DRK niche anti-magic mitigation. And I wouldn't be surprise if SE give a similar magic mitig to warrior.

[PyurBlue]

It's never really been a discussion, just a continuous dogpiling of complaints against WAR made by mostly non-WAR players.

The only thing that will actually settle any discussion is fixing DRK so they can go back to playing the game instead of spending all day here rationalizing their misfortunes upon WAR.

DRK has nothing to do with it. Non-WAR players are going to complain when WAR as it is takes away from their enjoyment, and they should. That's why there is a thread. WAR isn't fun to party with and is at odds with parts of the game.

A simple question on the core issue:

"Compared to other tanks, is the self sustainability of WAR balanced in dungeons or not?"

If yes, then please explain in the context of "tanks sustainability in dungeons"

If no, then limit BW heal scalibilty per target,which seems to be the solution requested by dissatisfied players, and a nerf which will only impact dungeons and no other content.

This is the question.

[CKNovel]

Even if we ignored that, you are suggesting that rather than simply adjusting the scaling factor for additional enemies struck by Bloodwhetting / Nascent so that it doesn't make up ~40% of a Warrior's sustain (vs. ~26% from Holy Shelltron, ~24% for TBN & Oblation, or ~24% for Heart of Corundum), we instead remove AoE from any and all future dungeons.

???

"???" indeed, what are you talking about?
It's okay to have Warrior performing better against multiple target, at least that's a win against homogenizing the game.

My suggestion is to make Bloodwhetting less stronger by shifting the damage spread & increasing damages. Yes, Warrior will still be very strong in AoE situation (Which is good as it would be its identity) but the impact of this strength would be lessened by the additional sources of damages it can't cover.

Making Bloodwhetting capped on 1 target is only going to make Warrior similar to heal as PLD or GNB. Healing in AoE situation will remain the same boring mess except the healer ego will be less damaged.
It's putting the problem under a sheet so it won't be so blatantly visible.

[Shurrikhan]

Mate, I never suggested capping the heal to a single target. Multiple of my posts here speak directly against that approach.

And were the advantage mild (instead of huge) and was compensated for by a weakness outside of its conditions in which it's advantaged (instead of it and the job as a whole still being in the lead regardless), I'd be fine with Bloodwhetting/Nascent and Warrior overall outperforming other on-demands and their jobs in multi-target. That's why I suggested it do so -- just to a reasonable degree. But instead, we've got something like if Dark Mind were already as good as Thrill/Camo generally and then got triple that value against magic as a "favored job" perk.

Some niche advantages are fine, but when you base them on broad categories (multi-target or single-target, magic or physical), you needlessly constrain either competitive job choice or encounter characteristics far more than you add to job flavor. Those capacities should be near to each other, with the differences being primarily in HOW one reaches those capacities.